Sandhusker said:What injunction? I don't there is any relationship between any injunction filed by R-CALF and US/Canadian discussions with the WTO.
Big Muddy rancher said:Sandhusker said:What injunction? I don't there is any relationship between any injunction filed by R-CALF and US/Canadian discussions with the WTO.
Now I know why SH calls you a pissant. You said that US should be working to harmonize regulations and I said that's what they were doing when R-CALF filed the INJUNCTION in Billing to stop the process of getting the Regultions harmonized with Canada which the world body OIE had set the standards.
Sandhusker said:Big Muddy rancher said:Sandhusker said:What injunction? I don't there is any relationship between any injunction filed by R-CALF and US/Canadian discussions with the WTO.
Now I know why SH calls you a pissant. You said that US should be working to harmonize regulations and I said that's what they were doing when R-CALF filed the INJUNCTION in Billing to stop the process of getting the Regultions harmonized with Canada which the world body OIE had set the standards.
R-CALF filed an injunction to stop harmonization with Canada?
BMR to (Sandbag): "Now I know why SH calls you a pissant."
Big Muddy rancher said:Sandhusker said:Big Muddy rancher said:Now I know why SH calls you a pissant. You said that US should be working to harmonize regulations and I said that's what they were doing when R-CALF filed the INJUNCTION in Billing to stop the process of getting the Regultions harmonized with Canada which the world body OIE had set the standards.
R-CALF filed an injunction to stop harmonization with Canada?
Yes and Canada and the US were harmonizing with the OIE.
Big Muddy rancher said:Again Leo said "We would prefer the U.S. government spend more time working to harmonize BSE standards around the globe, and less time on the now stalled WTO negotiations. That sort of adjustment would actually help U.S. cattle producers."
And I said that is what the USDA started by harmonizing standards with Canda within the OIE guidelines. The R-CALF injunction stopped the normalization of trade with Canada with in those guidelines.
With out starting some where and seeing as Canada was their biggest trading partner it only made sense to start getting trade rules harmonized with Canada.
Sandhusker said:Big Muddy rancher said:Again Leo said "We would prefer the U.S. government spend more time working to harmonize BSE standards around the globe, and less time on the now stalled WTO negotiations. That sort of adjustment would actually help U.S. cattle producers."
And I said that is what the USDA started by harmonizing standards with Canda within the OIE guidelines. The R-CALF injunction stopped the normalization of trade with Canada with in those guidelines.
With out starting some where and seeing as Canada was their biggest trading partner it only made sense to start getting trade rules harmonized with Canada.
:lol: :lol: Whatever, BMR. I'm not going to argue with you. Read the injunction.
Big Muddy rancher said:Come on Sandhusker explain Leo's statement for us.
Sandhusker said:Big Muddy rancher said:Come on Sandhusker explain Leo's statement for us.
I think Leo's statement is easy to understand. What needs explanation is how you link that to R-CALF's injunction.
Sandhusker said:Boy, you're really reaching, BMR! I'm going to file this right with your "fraction of" reasoning of a few days ago. :wink:
Leo was pointing out the differences around the globe with regard to BSE policies and the need to get everybody on the same page - to harmonize them.
Canada and the US were negotiating, but I would certainly hesitate to call negotiation "harmonization". There is a difference between negotiating an individual deal and "harmonizing" your standards. If you say the US and Canada were "harmonizing", that would mean they were striving to have the same standards for handling BSE. You have to consider that the US isn't even "harmonized" with itself - and you sure can't peg R-CALF for that.
Sandhusker said:Boy, you're really reaching, BMR! I'm going to file this right with your "fraction of" reasoning of a few days ago. :wink:
Leo was pointing out the differences around the globe with regard to BSE policies and the need to get everybody on the same page - to harmonize them.
Canada and the US were negotiating, but I would certainly hesitate to call negotiation "harmonization". There is a difference between negotiating an individual deal and "harmonizing" your standards. If you say the US and Canada were "harmonizing", that would mean they were striving to have the same standards for handling BSE. You have to consider that the US isn't even "harmonized" with itself - and you sure can't peg R-CALF for that.
Bill said:Sandhusker said:Boy, you're really reaching, BMR! I'm going to file this right with your "fraction of" reasoning of a few days ago. :wink:
Leo was pointing out the differences around the globe with regard to BSE policies and the need to get everybody on the same page - to harmonize them.
Canada and the US were negotiating, but I would certainly hesitate to call negotiation "harmonization". There is a difference between negotiating an individual deal and "harmonizing" your standards. If you say the US and Canada were "harmonizing", that would mean they were striving to have the same standards for handling BSE. You have to consider that the US isn't even "harmonized" with itself - and you sure can't peg R-CALF for that.
Yep that's what they were doing harmonizing with the OIE recommendations. Sandhusker have you ever heard the saying "when in a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging"? You have the knack of being able to dig the hole deeper even when at the top of the tree. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Sandhusker said:Statement on Hong Kong WTO Ministerial
(Billings, Mont.) – "The Hong Kong WTO ministerial this week will do little to help U.S. cattle producers, or production agriculture generally, in this country," said R-CALF USA President and Co-Founder Leo McDonnell. "Our sector of the U.S. agriculture industry faced a $3.3 billion trade deficit in 2004, and that red ink is growing. America's cattle producers need relief from predatory and unfair trade practices abroad. The current stalled state and structure of the WTO negotiations does little to help the U.S. cattle producer.
"USTR and USDA should advocate a sectoral initiative for cattle and beef that will open markets abroad by lowering global tariffs to U.S. levels and eliminating trade distorting subsidies other countries grant their cattle and beef producers," he emphasized. "USTR and USDA should also do a better job attacking informal barriers to U.S. cattle and beef. Currently, 53 nations have maintained complete or partial bans on U.S. beef exports because of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) concerns. USDA needs to open these markets and work toward upward harmonization of global standards.
"Monday, Japan opened its market to U.S. beef products from cattle younger than 21 months of age, while the U.S. announced its intention to open our own market to Japanese beef products from cattle of all ages," McDonnell pointed out. "While we are glad to be back in the Japanese market, that kind of action by our government is not a consistent approach. We would prefer the U.S. government spend more time working to harmonize BSE standards around the globe, and less time on the now stalled WTO negotiations. That sort of adjustment would actually help U.S. cattle producers.
"In addition, it is important to have the option of long phase-in periods for tariff reductions in regional and bilateral trade agreements, for both developing and developed countries," he continued. "Under the draft ministerial declaration issued by WTO Director General Pascal Lamy, developing countries would get a better deal than nations like the United States. If Lamy's proposal were to be adopted, it could be impossible to have the 18-year phase-out on beef import tariffs that R-CALF obtained in the U.S. - Australian FTA. Instead, we could be limited to much shorter phase-outs that would make it easier for foreign competitors to flood our markets with their beef."
McDonnell also said there needs to be stronger safeguards at the WTO for perishable and cyclical products.
"Some in the Administration are blocking even an attempt to make a proposal in this area, despite instructions from Congress in the Trade Act of 2002 to do so," he explained.
"Finally, we need to make sure that the U.S. cattle and beef sectors and U.S. agriculture in general can effectively access domestic trade-remedy laws, so we have the ability to go after unfair foreign trade practices by utilizing those anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws," insisted McDonnell. "Instead, in the face of relentless attacks on these laws at the WTO, and despite repeated urging from Congress to vigorously protect our trade laws, U.S. negotiators appear to be missing in action.
"Clearly, the Hong Kong WTO Ministerial will be difficult for all concerned because it is becoming increasingly difficult for the WTO to respond to both multinational corporations and the concerns that regular citizens have about the current course of globalization," he commented. "The same divide is apparent here in the U.S., where production agriculture is no longer taking a backseat to agribusiness when it comes to trade policy, and is giving voice to the needs of family farmers, independent ranchers, and other producers who demand that trade policy reflect the needs of all sectors of U.S. agriculture."
McDonnell said current U.S. trade policy is not working for the American rancher.
"In the face of a disappearing surplus in agriculture, overall, and a growing deficit in cattle and beef, America's producers can no longer afford to continue business as usual," he stressed. "Unfortunately, this week's WTO ministerial in Hong Kong offers little hope of a bold new direction.
"R-CALF USA will continue to work with the Administration and Congress to push for a comprehensive approach to the global barriers and distortions faced by our members, and to fight for a trade policy that works for U.S. cattle producers," McDonnell concluded.
# # #
R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on domestic and international trade and marketing issues. R-CALF USA, a national, non-profit organization, is dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA's membership consists primarily of cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and feedlot owners. Its members – over 18,000 strong – are located in 47 states, and the organization has over 60 local and state association affiliates, from both cattle and farm organizations. Various main street businesses are associate members of R-CALF USA. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.
Don't they mean will continue to take the Administration to COURT